Order in the court and darkness, too

The least visible branch of the federal government got back to work on Monday in its usual fashion: without fanfare or hoopla. The U.S. Supreme Court, which begins its term each fall on the first Monday in October, did exactly that.

But as there are no television cameras allowed in the court, no microphones even for a radio broadcast, the highest court in the land set to work largely out of sight of the people.

This is a shame. You can turn on the TV and see lawmakers in action on C-Span. And the president is part of the daily news each and every day - as all modern presidents have been.

But the nine justices of the Supreme Court are acting backstage. Can you even easily form a mental picture of, say, Justice Stephen Breyer?

The court's work, while out of sight, is of paramount importance, and the new term, while looking at the outset to be particularly uneventful, might well hold in store decisions that could reverberate for decades to come.

Add in the possibility of one or more retirements by the term's end next June, and you are looking at the possibility of some real drama ahead. Any vacancy on the court, of course, would be filled by the next president - with the advice and consent of the newly elected Senate.

But that's for the future. For now, the court has decided to beef up its calendar, hearing three cases per day instead of the two that had been the norm. This will likely result in more rulings throughout the year instead of a rush of decisions as the term is coming to a close next spring.

That would be a most welcome change, but not as welcome as TV cameras in the court.

There is no good reason for the high court to keep the citizens in the dark regarding its proceedings. We can only hope that one year - next year, perhaps? - the court will begin its term on the first Monday in October by flipping a switch and turning on a couple of TV cameras.

The least visible branch of the government doesn't have to stay that way.